Background
Police received tips about a drug dealer known as Blessed, who was described as armed and living near North forty-second Street. Surveillance showed the defendant, Fernando Bolden, entering a residence at seven thousand one hundred sixty-nine North forty-second Street carrying a gun. A search warrant was obtained based on an affidavit stating Bolden had access to the home. The search yielded firearms, drugs, and cash. Bolden pleaded guilty to firearms charges while reserving his right to challenge the warrant’s validity and the affiant’s credibility.
The court’s reasoning
The court acknowledged that the affidavit might not have established probable cause to search the residence, as it did not definitively prove Bolden lived there. However, the court concluded that resolving the probable cause question was unnecessary. The search was valid under the good-faith exception established in United States v. Leon. The court found no evidence that the affiant acted with reckless or knowing disregard for the truth. The video evidence corroborated the affiant’s statement that Bolden entered the residence with keys, even if the video did not show the specific moment the lock was turned. Furthermore, the omission of a prior address from a paternity docket did not constitute a reckless omission because the affidavit did not claim Bolden resided there, only that he had access.
So we affirm Bolden’s convictions on that basis.
What it means going forward
The ruling reinforces that search warrants will likely be upheld under the good-faith exception even if the underlying probable cause is debatable, provided the officers did not act with reckless disregard for the truth.